Skip to main content

About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
'm asking you a question, senator hagel. >> mccain, inhofe, graham, and cruz all trying to destroy the president's pick for secretary of defense, who just happens to be a republican. retired colonel lawrence wilkerson breaks down today's bizarre proceedings. >>> plus, jonathan alter on the new democratic plan to take back the house using citizens united. >>> another big-time republican reveals his disgust for moochers on social security and medicare. richard wolffe, howard fineman, and david corn break down the gop's ongoing problem with half of america. >>> and in center left america, it is no longer okay to be a homophobic professional athlete. >> to let all lgbt teens know that it gets better. >> we'll tell you about the inspiring backlash to a 49ers' anti-gay slur. >>> good to have you with us tonight, folks. thanks for watching. you know, if you had lunch with somebody every tuesday for 12 years, do you think you'd feel like you have kind of got to know them a little bit? chuck hagel must have felt blindsided today by old senate friends. because today republican senators looke
carthyism and this weird unconnectedness, attacking chuck hagel, for example, because no one will give us info or anyone info about the benghazi situation even though hagel wasn't even in the government when benghazi happened. sick stuff. and it seems to be growing in inverse proportion to obama's popularity. the better he looks, the worse these characters, inhofe, cruz, mccain, and lindsey graham, are determined to look. did you notice the smile on john boehner's face sitting up there behind the president during the state of the union? if you did, you're imagining things. so afraid of the hard hating right of republicans these days of every stripe, even boehner's scared to death of looking like he might like something barack obama had to say. to do that is to risk political death in these days. let's go at it. our guests are joy reid of the grio and michael steele, former chairman of the republican national committee. both are msnbc analysts and good ones. let's take a look at this. is this delay on the hagel vote about playing for time hoping new information comes out about them? "the new york times"
conference on benghazi. mccain was addressing the republican tactic of filibustering the hagel confirmation to get more answers on benghazi. >> this are other questions that need to be answered, and we feel that the intervening week and a half almost is sufficient time to get those questions answered. >> so from that comment right there to "meet the press", something must have happened, because mccain wasn't talking about a massive cover-up there. in fact, he seems confident that the questions will get answered. even in his interview with david gregory yesterday, mccain admitted the filibuster of hagel would end. >> but he will be confirmed. and we will have a vote when we get back. and i'm confident that senator hagel will probably have the votes necessary to be confirmed as the secretary of defense. >> round and round and -- it just doesn't seem to add up, does it? if mccain is filibustering hague toll get answers on benghazi, and if mccain claims there is a massive cover-up, then why would mccain allow the hagel vote to move forward after a week and a half? well, time's up. clock hit rig
. senators lindsey graham and kelly ayotte have written a letter to defense secretary nominee chuck hagel asking him to clarify something he may or may not have said back in 2007. well, graham explains the letter's content on fox news sunday. >> there was a blog posting about a speech i think in 2007 or '08 that chuck hagel made at rutgers university and put on his blog the next day six points of the speech. question-and-answer session, and point six was allegedly senator hagel said the u.s. state department was an adjunct of the israeli foreign minister's office, which i think would be breathtaking if he said that. >> okay. so let's see if we're all on the same page here and have this correct. a right-wing website publishes a resumer from a blog based on something hagel may or may not have said in a speech over, count them, five years ago. and now sitting united states senators are demanding hagel explain himself. hagel provided ayotte and graham with a copy of the speech and notes he does not recall making any such statement. now, folks, this is a pattern for the new gop that maybe mr.
he's talking about possibly delaying chuck hagel's nomination. and also wayne lapierre. this is very important. because if you look at the profiles of all the people that committed these mass murders in newtown and aurora and across -- virginia tech, they are all hispanic drug gang leaders. and that's exactly what wayne lapierre said in an op-ed that americans need to buy guns because those latin americans are coming to america, and they're going to kill you people. this is who a lot of republicans in congress are thinking about falling off -- don't do it. don't hurt our party anymore. let wayne lapierre go wherever he wants to go. he's going to destroy the party. we're going to talk about the crazy op-ed has horrible for our party's image, horrible for the conservative movement's image, goes against everything ronald reagan stood for. we'll talk about that in a minute. first, breaking news. this is bizarre. the feel-good story of the olympic games involved in possibly murder. >> this was a total jaw-dropper this morning. oscar pistorius, for those people who don't know, is a south a
in benghazi. >> i don't think we should allow brennan to go forward for the cia directorship, hagel to be confirmed as secretary of defense until the white house gives us an accounting, did the president ever pick up the phone and call anyone in the libyan government to help these folks? what did the president do? yes, i'm going to ask my colleagues just like they did with john bolton, joe biden said, no confirmation without information. no confirmation without information. >> you are saying that you are going to block the nominations -- you're going to block them from coming to a vote until you get an answer? >> yes. >> now, john mccain has already think that he doesn't think republicans ought to filibuster this. what will you do? you're just going to put a hold on it? >> yeah, i'm not filibustering. this is a national security failure of monumental proportions, and i'm not going to stop until we get to the bottom of it. >> first of all, i'm shocked. you know, lindsey graham doesn't usually like getting in front of a camera and going on the sunday talk shows. so i'm shocked that li
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)